a jaded point of view…
When teaching music theory to students, I always add that it is a simple subject, very simple and would have to be because “all musicians are idiots”. Now before you become personally offended, let me explain.
I have seen great players that do not know the first thing about music theory or it’s usage. I have seen one doctorate of music after another poorly or mis-explain music theory (as if they really don’t understand what they are saying). I have met many great players that think that music theory and improvisation cannot be taught to a person (they either have it or they don’t).
Now I am no genius. And I have met a few musicians that were of average intellegence or better, but for the most part, it seems like musicians are lost in their own art. They rarely understand the simple workings of the musical language. And when they pass on that information, it is often passed on in a twisted way; completely missing the point of the theory they were trying to teach.
What do you think?
Mike
Theo who ? 
Theo Ry, Mr. and Mrs. Ry’s boy!
You really have met that many music doctorates who can’t explain music theory? Perhaps they were from Julliard? Anyway, if your sample is of folks who got a guitar a few years ago at Guitar Center, well that’s not a good sample. If your sample is of employed orchestral musicians, you’d get a different result.
I’d also say that there is a grain of truth to the idea that aspects of theory (including improv) can’t be taught - you and I both know that there is an original component to composition of any sort.
Music is a fact not a theory…
…
Ali,
I think that is a bit like asking if knowledge of grammar is a hindrance to a writer.
dave
| Quote (dave @ Jan. 17 2005,14:35) |
| Ali, I think that is a bit like asking if knowledge of grammar is a hindrance to a writer. dave |
I agree Dave.
Having been a professional guitarist and singer for the last 30 years, and having owned and run 3 music schools for more than 20 years, practically everyone i know is a musician. I have taught Philly Orchestra musicians and 2 year olds. I know many music doctorates including conductors and performers and teachers. The vast majority are really quite slow intellectually. Don't get me wrong. These people earned their doctorate in their specific field. But it was amazing to see how many had no knowledge of music theory. Even more amazing is the number of college music teachers that are ignorant of what music theory is and how it is used.
Ali, knowledge is not a hinderance. I used to think it might be before I bothered to learn scales/harmonys and their usage. I used to think that music theory might make my writing stiff and robotic in nature. It is frighteningly simple and quite freeing when you realize how powerful this knowledge is. You no longer are guessing and relying only on your ear when you play and write music.
Anyway, I still think that musicians are not always the sharpest crayon in the box. And if you take lessons in music, make sure your teacher know what they are talking about.
Mike
The greatest improvisers are almost always monster theorists. Case in point: Keith Jarrett.
I dunno, Mike, I guess we have a good bunch of music teachers here… 
When you say no knowledge, how do you mean? Are you talking about folks who can’t tell you that an octave is a 1:2 ratio or that a fifth is 2:3 etc? Or are talking about the use of a diminished chord as a pivot point? The fact that a Maj7 is a the I and the III of a major scale combined? Or are you meaning not to use parrallel fifths and that tritones aren’t great for writing children’s songs
| Quote (Bubbagump @ Jan. 17 2005,16:53) |
| ... Or are you meaning not to use parrallel fifths and that tritones aren't great for writing children's songs |
Says who?
"Maria..." (Ok, it's not a children's song, but my kids like it...)
I think it depends on what you are trying to do…
If your aim/purpose is to just write/play your own music and you have the ability to play what’s in your head then you may have no nead for theory.
This ability may be a “natural” talent that some people have or it may be a result of many hours of practice - not theoreticaly practice but copying songs you like and trying to emulate them and having something in your brain put it all together so you are then able to express yourself how you want.
If you don’t have that ability to be able to just play what is in your head, then it may be advantageous to have some musical theory so that you can think “I want to play a minor chord” or whatever and do it.
These are just 2 different points of reference - the first being experience, the second being a mixture of theoretical knowledge and the concept of what that translates to in sound.
If your aim though is to communicate your or any music to others (either as an instructor or as part of a band/group) then knowledge of theory is pretty important as it allows a common standard “language”. Unless of course everyone in the band has no theory knowledge and they develop their own form of communication.
I would say from my experience most musicians have the level of theoretical knowledge that suits their needs.
Someone who is in a situation in which they need to know more than they do will usually get to do some reading or fall by the wayside
Rich
| Quote (Bubbagump @ Jan. 17 2005,16:53) |
| When you say no knowledge, how do you mean? Are you talking about folks who can't tell you that an octave is a 1:2 ratio or that a fifth is 2:3 etc? Or are talking about the use of a diminished chord as a pivot point? The fact that a Maj7 is a the I and the III of a major scale combined? Or are you meaning not to use parrallel fifths and that tritones aren't great for writing children's songs |
Avoiding parallel fifths has not been a problem for over a hundred years. Unfortunately, many college theory teachers teach that one like it has a basis today. That is one of the problems.
I don't believe that knowing the ratios (1:2, 1:3, 1:4) are important to most musicians unless they are trying to create sounds through synthesis.
You are scratching the surface when you mention stacking triads. I mostly am talking about scale to chord relationships, transposing, reading music, aural dictation ability, and the like.
It is amazingly simple stuff, yet very few "musicians" know what they are doing. In all fairness, there have been a few musicians I know that do understand and use this material. But in the grand scheme of "musicians", they are in the minority.
Sorry about this post. I should have realized this was going to sit poorly with many people. I've been dealing with this situation for so long, that it has become sort of funny to me. Kind of like the joke: "How do you keep a guitar player from playing?
Put sheet music in front of him."
Mike
Hi friends. I dont understand at all your point Mike (that can probe your theory, isnt 
. Like ever, i can guilt im talk spanish (good excuse!)
Im not sure what you mean, but i can say this to you: Where i live, if you decide to study music in a “serious” place you will spent 7 to 10 years of your live studying Music theory. You will be able to read staffs and you will know the basis of theory. But not necesarily you will be a good musician.
The ingredients to be a good musicians are beyond the fact to know or not the music theory. Music theory can enrich your musical mind. This can be doing also hearing music too, but be aware that know Music Theory can be a VERY BAD thing. It can FIX your ideas and shut the door to the new ones because “paralel fifhts are not allowed”. Also musicians that dont anger to do nothing that is not notated.
I know musicians that dont know nothing about read a score, but get a ticket for them, sit hear them and learn what means creativity and expressivity.
Your last joke is funny. I live in a country where aborigin/spanish folclore is taken seriously by many people. And you will be surprised how many of them dont take seriously people that needs a paper in front of them to play music. Music comes from my soul, not from a paper, they will say.
Well, a diffrent point of view. Or not?
See you!
I only know the most basic of theory, and often fall into the “I’ll know it’s right when it sounds good” department when writing chord progressions on new songs.
But on the other hand… Some styles of music have such predictable patterns (Country, blues, rock) that one must wonder if some writers were “over” trained (they were stuck doing only what they were taught) or if they were “under” trained (they could only copy what they heard in other songs, and lacked the knowledge to confidently explore further)?
I guess it’s like someone that has the imagination to come up with great stories but lack the grammatical skills to properly convey his ideas to a reader, as opposed to someone with perfect grammar and no imagination.
…Not really sure if I have a point or not… I’m tired.
-John
| Quote (John @ Jan. 17 2005,23:04) |
| I only know the most basic of theory, and often fall into the "I'll know it's right when it sounds good" department when writing chord progressions on new songs. I guess it's like someone that has the imagination to come up with great stories but lack the grammatical skills to properly convey his ideas to a reader, as opposed to someone with perfect grammar and no imagination. ...Not really sure if I have a point or not... I'm tired. -John
|
John, your point and Marces are common mindsets among those who are leary of music theory. THey are often afraid that their writing will become mechanical or soulless. This can be possible among those people who write in a soulless manner. I am all for improvisation and creativity. John Coltrane (I believe) once said that you should learn all there is to scales and chords (theory) and then forget it and play. That is how I feel. There is so much to learn that will help all players and they need only to use what they find helpful. Then they need to play.
Marce made a good point. My guitar professor in college was not much of a technician on the guitar. He was much more into teaching "how to play in a musical fashion" or "how to be musical". I appreciated this since I found it easy to learn technique and theory. But here again, I feel differently than many about teaching musicianship. I believe you CAN teach feeling to anyone. That people can be taught how to breathe with their instrument and phrase in natural ways that fit the music being played. That people can be taught to emote feeling in their playing.
Can you tell I love to teach?.... lol
Mike
You can teach all the theory you want, teach all the scales you want, if the player/writer ain’t got it, he/she ain’t got it. Put sheet music in front of guitarist to make him quit playing very true, same time take trained read it off the sheet guitarist to jam session, he winds up in corner sucking his thumb.
I’d Love To Teach The World To Sing, unfortunetly 99 percent can’t carry a tune in a bucket even if you filled it up 3/4 for 'em.
And then again, I’ll just shut up and play my guitar.
| Quote (YazMiester @ Jan. 18 2005,05:30) |
| You can teach all the theory you want, teach all the scales you want, if the player/writer ain't got it, he/she ain't got it. Put sheet music in front of guitarist to make him quit playing very true, same time take trained read it off the sheet guitarist to jam session, he winds up in corner sucking his thumb. I'd Love To Teach The World To Sing, unfortunetly 99 percent can't carry a tune in a bucket even if you filled it up 3/4 for 'em. And then again, I'll just shut up and play my guitar.:D |
There seems to be 2 mindsets when it comes to learning the guitar. Either you "learn by ear" or you "learn by reading". I'm here to say that they are both equally important if you want to be a well rounded musician. Oh, you can sit there and point out the other musician's weaknesses, but the only weaknesses that are important are your own.
Now as far as 99% of the world not being able to carry a tune in a bucket, that number is much closer to 2%+. That percentage is the number of "tone deaf" people. And although not everyone can sing like a YazMiester, there is the possibility that not everyone wants to.
take care,
Mike
More theory is never a problem it never kills musicianship, it can only enhance it. IMHO, but I totally believe that. I also would bet that you are right, Mike, that most non-classical guitarists can’t read music, can’t sight sing, can’t analyze the harmonic structure of a piece (I’m a Schenkerian, so it’s easy, everything is I-V-I! small joke there… ), don’t know how to make sense of a melody, etc…then again most of those folks are not into music for that reason, they just like to make music for the fun of it. I read only poorly, I should confess.
But about those music professors…